Bad reporting about Ferguson officer injury
"The chief says a suspect shoved officer Brown with his shoulder, causing him to fall to the ground and hit his head."
The video report saves this information for 1 minute, 41 seconds in.
"Chief Doyle says the demonstration was mostly peaceful, but several times throughout Friday night, some people shook the department's fence."
Chief Doyle says they broke part of the bottom of the fence.
This we hear at 2 minutes.
There is no body cam footage, no statement from the suspects, their families, or their attorneys.
They do not report about the suspect's friends, family, supporters, hobbies, upbringing, or history. We do not hear about the struggle he's living with in jail, (maybe) concerned about the cost of hiring a good attorney, or the fact that he will be fighting for his freedom.
Edit: The head injury happened when police went to arrest the 5 people allegedly damaging the fence. I failed to include this below. I believe it was the latter half of the video.
Their Reporting
The video title is Officer critically injured, 5 charged after protest outside Ferguson Police Department
It describes that a (named and pictured) suspect is charged with first degree assault, resisting arrest, and property damage. $500,000 bond.
"Four other people are also facing charges tonight from the protest, marking ten years since the police killing of Michael Brown"
The next reporter talks about the officer's life threatening condition. A clip of police Chief Doyle saying "We won't allow you [violent protestors] to destroy this city".
They pan across a room of police officers, stating "dozens of police officers, standing together as one of their own fights for his life following a demonstration turning violent".
A clip plays: Doyle speaks well of officer Brown, saying he's the kind of cop we want, that he got into this to be part of the change of the system.
They show officer Brown's vest for 9 seconds while repeating earlier reporting.
After, "The chief says a suspect shoved officer Brown with his shoulder, causing him to fall to the ground and hit his head."
Then they show demonstrators "marking the tenth anniversary of the death of Michael Brown", people basically just standing around.
"Chief Doyle says the demonstration was mostly peaceful, but several times throughout Friday night, some people shook the department's fence."
Chief Doyle says they broke part of the bottom of the fence.
After a little more reporting, County Prosecutor emphasizes that people have a right to peacefully protest, but when that line is crossed people have to be held accountable.
Later, Doyle speaks of the new diversity of the police force & how "the officers here", who weren't there in 2014, shouldn't have to "suffer through this".
And Doyle says two other officers are injured, one with an ankle injury, and another getting cut.
They immediately conclude the reporting, no further information about those two injuries.
My problem with this
They were not fact-forward, they only told one side's version of the story, and they used unnecessary emotional language.
If they were fact-forward, like this blog post is, I wouldn't care near as much about the other two problems.
The problem is that you get the police's narrative and an emotional view on the situation BEFORE you learn the facts of the situation.
This made me pre-judge the protesters and the suspects.
It's bad to shove a cop & knock him down, if that's what happened. It's not proven yet, no evidence is presented, and no challenge to the police's narrative is present.
Conclusion, opinion on the situation
A man shoved a cop with his shoulder. The cop fell and hit his head and is in critical condition. I hope the officer's okay.
A fence got shaken and partially broken. I hope it's a cheap and easy repair.
5 people got arrested, and I hope they are able to get their freedom, or at least good representation, and not recidivate. If any of them are found guilty, I hope they get reasonable & appropriate accountability.
But my opinions on the situation aside ... the reporting in the video was bad and risks manufacturing a particular view after watching the story.
(Do they have studies on that? Like get 100 people and show them a story told like this. Get another hundred people and show them a story told like I want it to be. Then ask participants questions and compare what opinions they hold afterward.)